<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Knowledge Graphs | Enjun Du（杜恩俊）</title><link>https://enjundu.com/tags/knowledge-graphs/</link><atom:link href="https://enjundu.com/tags/knowledge-graphs/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><description>Knowledge Graphs</description><generator>Hugo Blox Builder (https://hugoblox.com)</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>GraphOracle: Efficient Fully-Inductive Knowledge Graph Reasoning via Relation-Dependency Graphs</title><link>https://enjundu.com/blog/graphoracle/</link><pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://enjundu.com/blog/graphoracle/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="abstract">Abstract&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>Knowledge-graph reasoners often struggle when test-time entities and relations were never observed during training. &lt;strong>GraphOracle&lt;/strong> addresses this fully-inductive setting by converting each knowledge graph into a directed &lt;strong>Relation-Dependency Graph (RDG)&lt;/strong>. The RDG captures how relations compose, and its query-aware embeddings guide answer prediction on the original entity graph.&lt;/p>
&lt;hr>
&lt;h2 id="motivation">Motivation&lt;/h2>
&lt;blockquote>
&lt;p>Relation order matters: “born in → located in” carries a compositional direction that an undirected relation graph erases.&lt;/p>
&lt;/blockquote>
&lt;p>Existing fully-inductive methods construct dense, undirected relation graphs. This makes computation expensive and loses directional dependencies that are essential for multi-hop reasoning. The same limitation makes it difficult to transfer a learned reasoner across domains with different entity and relation vocabularies.&lt;/p>
&lt;hr>
&lt;h2 id="method">Method&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Framework" srcset="
/blog/graphoracle/framework_hu17442796894096862171.webp 400w,
/blog/graphoracle/framework_hu16880348516718552876.webp 760w,
/blog/graphoracle/framework_hu17354898415690024261.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/graphoracle/framework_hu17442796894096862171.webp"
width="760"
height="303"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>GraphOracle operates in three stages:&lt;/p>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>RDG Construction&lt;/strong> — Transform the KG into a directed Relation-Dependency Graph where edge &lt;em>(r_i, r_j)&lt;/em> indicates that relation &lt;em>r_i&lt;/em> precedes &lt;em>r_j&lt;/em> in observed triple chains. This is significantly sparser than prior relation graphs while capturing compositional patterns.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Query-Dependent Multi-Head Attention&lt;/strong> — For each query relation, a multi-head attention GNN propagates messages over the RDG to produce context-aware relation embeddings. The same relation gets different representations depending on the query context.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Entity-Level Answer Prediction&lt;/strong> — The learned relation embeddings parameterize a second GNN on the original KG entity graph, performing inductive message passing from the query entity to score candidates.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;hr>
&lt;h2 id="experimental-results">Experimental Results&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>Evaluated across &lt;strong>60 benchmarks&lt;/strong> spanning transductive, entity-inductive, fully-inductive, and cross-domain settings.&lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="mrr-comparison-on-60-datasets">MRR Comparison on 60 Datasets&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="MRR Comparison" srcset="
/blog/graphoracle/mrr_comparison_hu8110470002604910957.webp 400w,
/blog/graphoracle/mrr_comparison_hu4321970991457367304.webp 760w,
/blog/graphoracle/mrr_comparison_hu128044742679316233.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/graphoracle/mrr_comparison_hu8110470002604910957.webp"
width="760"
height="272"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>GraphOracle (red) consistently matches or outperforms supervised SOTA (green) across all 60 datasets, with particularly strong gains on cross-domain and biomedical KGs.&lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="average-performance-4-settings">Average Performance (4 Settings)&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Main Results" srcset="
/blog/graphoracle/main_results_hu16923454802355985960.webp 400w,
/blog/graphoracle/main_results_hu7398350365299240702.webp 760w,
/blog/graphoracle/main_results_hu2897405029583734145.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/graphoracle/main_results_hu16923454802355985960.webp"
width="760"
height="377"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>GraphOracle achieves &lt;strong>+7.19%&lt;/strong> MRR improvement in transductive, &lt;strong>+10.86%&lt;/strong> in entity-inductive, &lt;strong>+13.28%&lt;/strong> in fully-inductive, and &lt;strong>+26.82%&lt;/strong> in cross-domain settings over supervised SOTA.&lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="ablation-study">Ablation Study&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Ablation" srcset="
/blog/graphoracle/ablation_hu6660703363372269825.webp 400w,
/blog/graphoracle/ablation_hu3398867998203931436.webp 760w,
/blog/graphoracle/ablation_hu14131753493942245603.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/graphoracle/ablation_hu6660703363372269825.webp"
width="760"
height="220"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Removing the RDG structure or multi-head attention causes significant performance drops, confirming both components are essential. The directed precedence encoding is the single most important design choice.&lt;/p></description></item><item><title>MoKGR: Mixture of Length and Pruning Experts for Knowledge Graphs Reasoning</title><link>https://enjundu.com/blog/mokgr/</link><pubDate>Sun, 19 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://enjundu.com/blog/mokgr/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="abstract">Abstract&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>Knowledge-graph reasoning depends on finding the right paths—not simply exploring more of them. &lt;strong>MoKGR&lt;/strong> personalizes graph traversal with two mixture-of-experts modules: one chooses an appropriate reasoning depth for each query, while the other decides which candidate paths deserve to survive.&lt;/p>
&lt;hr>
&lt;h2 id="motivation">Motivation&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Motivation" srcset="
/blog/mokgr/motivation_hu18331973836230186814.webp 400w,
/blog/mokgr/motivation_hu8395380476757186774.webp 760w,
/blog/mokgr/motivation_hu1535173140742592088.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/mokgr/motivation_hu18331973836230186814.webp"
width="760"
height="263"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;blockquote>
&lt;p>Different questions over the same graph may need completely different search budgets.&lt;/p>
&lt;/blockquote>
&lt;p>The query &lt;em>(JACK, followed, ?)&lt;/em> may resolve within three hops, while &lt;em>(JACK, watched, ?)&lt;/em> can require deeper exploration. Fixed-depth GNNs spend too much work on simple questions and stop too early on difficult ones. Uniform pruning compounds the problem by applying one notion of relevance to every relation and query.&lt;/p>
&lt;hr>
&lt;h2 id="method">Method&lt;/h2>
&lt;p>MoKGR introduces two complementary Mixture-of-Experts modules:&lt;/p>
&lt;ul>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Mixture of Length Experts&lt;/strong> — Experts specialize at different reasoning depths. A learned gate assigns query-specific weights, routing simple queries toward short paths and complex queries toward deeper ones.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>Mixture of Pruning Experts&lt;/strong> — At each layer, multiple experts judge candidate paths from complementary perspectives before a learned aggregation keeps the most informative ones.&lt;/li>
&lt;li>&lt;strong>End-to-End Training&lt;/strong> — Both modules are trained jointly with the answer prediction objective, ensuring optimal synergy between depth selection and path pruning.&lt;/li>
&lt;/ul>
&lt;hr>
&lt;h2 id="experimental-results">Experimental Results&lt;/h2>
&lt;h3 id="transductive-setting-6-benchmarks">Transductive Setting (6 Benchmarks)&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Main Results" srcset="
/blog/mokgr/main_results_hu4027277364006651311.webp 400w,
/blog/mokgr/main_results_hu18083655024233074811.webp 760w,
/blog/mokgr/main_results_hu9320919145034146317.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/mokgr/main_results_hu4027277364006651311.webp"
width="760"
height="377"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>MoKGR achieves the best results across all 6 benchmarks (Family, UMLS, WN18RR, FB15k237, NELL-995, YAGO3-10), outperforming both non-GNN baselines and state-of-the-art GNN methods including NBFNet, RED-GNN, A*Net, and AdaProp.&lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="efficiency--convergence">Efficiency &amp;amp; Convergence&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Efficiency" srcset="
/blog/mokgr/efficiency_hu456109630554495659.webp 400w,
/blog/mokgr/efficiency_hu15649622221185549166.webp 760w,
/blog/mokgr/efficiency_hu12605689778133533305.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/mokgr/efficiency_hu456109630554495659.webp"
width="760"
height="343"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>MoKGR converges significantly faster than competing methods while maintaining lower inference time, demonstrating that personalized path exploration is both more accurate and more efficient.&lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="expert-selection-analysis">Expert Selection Analysis&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Expert Analysis" srcset="
/blog/mokgr/expert_analysis_hu3306128304441321640.webp 400w,
/blog/mokgr/expert_analysis_hu15479781568752159853.webp 760w,
/blog/mokgr/expert_analysis_hu2064557752867909043.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/mokgr/expert_analysis_hu3306128304441321640.webp"
width="631"
height="760"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>The learned gating weights show interpretable patterns: the model prefers medium-length paths overall, but adapts dynamically — shorter paths for simple relational queries, deeper paths for complex multi-hop reasoning.&lt;/p>
&lt;h3 id="ablation-study">Ablation Study&lt;/h3>
&lt;p>
&lt;figure >
&lt;div class="flex justify-center ">
&lt;div class="w-100" >&lt;img alt="Ablation" srcset="
/blog/mokgr/ablation_hu12758446644151472906.webp 400w,
/blog/mokgr/ablation_hu6592786270217265840.webp 760w,
/blog/mokgr/ablation_hu10597442056394429424.webp 1200w"
src="https://enjundu.com/blog/mokgr/ablation_hu12758446644151472906.webp"
width="760"
height="640"
loading="lazy" data-zoomable />&lt;/div>
&lt;/div>&lt;/figure>
&lt;/p>
&lt;p>Removing the length experts causes the largest drop, confirming that adaptive depth is the most critical innovation. Removing pruning experts or using a single expert also degrades performance.&lt;/p></description></item></channel></rss>